Ten Questions for the Secretary of Education: Redux

A year ago, I penned a piece asking then-new Secretary of Education Arne Duncan ten questions about the challenges of promoting the administration's reform agenda and spending stimulus dollars wisely. With more than $100 billion in stimulus funds and a slew of promises about transformative change and increased transparency, the queries were intended to help observers figure out how much stock to put in the Secretary's bold talk.

I looked back the other day, curious to see how he'd fared. I'll just say that I was not impressed. But I'm less interested in my take and more curious in how you all think Secretary Duncan has performed on these counts. I've posted the questions below and would welcome your take. Where has he delivered? Where has he come up short? (Or, if you deem these the wrong questions, what are the right ones?)

1) In making the case for the stimulus package, you repeatedly cited a University of Washington study that reported that 600,000 jobs were at risk. Indeed, the first directive in your department's guidance on stimulus spending is, "spend funds quickly to save and create jobs." Yet you've also indicated a concern about wasteful spending. Would you regard it as a problem if the money were spent inefficiently, but created jobs? If your answer is yes, what are you prepared to do to stop it?

2) The stimulus bill creates an "Invest in What Works and Innovation" fund through which your department is to fund programs that "scale up what works." However, much of "what works" today is elite charter schools fueled by talented staff, missionary zeal, and philanthropic support. These commodities are in limited supply, and history shows that their successes are tough to replicate on a wide scale. How will you ensure that funding "what works" doesn't slosh dollars into terrific boutique programs that don't easily scale?

3) The president announced his intention to "scrub" the budget for wasteful or inefficient programs. Which education programs have been identified?

4) In Chicago, despite the backing of perhaps the nation's strongest mayor, energetic business and civic leadership, and the entrepreneurial Chicago Education Fund, it appears that most of your successes entailed reforms like merit-pay pilot programs and charter schools -- reforms that come on top of and around the existing school system. Do you agree with this characterization? If so, do you think the "on top of and around" strategy is viable for transforming K-12 schooling across the country?

5) The president's call for "performance pay" was met with agreement by the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association (NEA) -- because they say he is proposing the kind of pay reform that they like. Do you think it's possible to craft a substantial, game-changing merit-pay plan that the NEA will endorse? Also, your time in Chicago was marked by relatively collegial relations with the Chicago Teachers Union. What was your secret?

6) You and the president have touted the $5 billion for preschool in the stimulus, arguing that high-quality early-childhood programs can make a big difference. The premise seems reasonable, but there is scant evidence of such programs delivering big, sustained benefits for large numbers of children. How can we be confident that the money will fund difference-making programs and not simply pad enrollment or staffing levels? And what are you prepared to do if the latter happens?

7) You and the president have both championed charter schools, and the president has called for states to remove caps on the allowable number of charters. As you know from experience, there are many less formal restrictions that hinder charter schools, including unfriendly state and federal regulations, facilities headaches, and teacher-certification policies. Do you intend to use your bully pulpit to spotlight those barriers and, when possible, remove them?

8) You have supported stricter national standards. But with disputes over the merits of "21st century" skills and concerns that bad standards might crowd out good ones, how confident are you that such a reform would end well? How would you know if the effort was going off the rails, and would we be able to limit the fallout if it did?

9) The president has said to the nation's governors and mayors that if they don't spend the stimulus funds wisely, he will "call them out and put a stop to it." In your view, how would we know if education funds were misspent? What is an example of misspending that you would deem egregious enough that you might say, "Mr. President, we need to get those dollars back"?

10) The president has talked about the importance of every American attending at least one year of postsecondary study. History suggests that universal access tends to encourage a decline in rigor and the relaxation of standards. Does that possibility worry you? If so, how do you intend to police against such concerns?

Curious to hear your thoughts.

Categories:

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.

The opinions expressed in Rick Hess Straight Up are strictly those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinions or endorsement of Editorial Projects in Education, or any of its publications.